mimo.health

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. The description indicates it checks non-destructive aspects (availability), but lacks details on behavior such as network calls, failure handling, or response format. Adequate but not thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the key purpose. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of a health check tool covering four areas, the description is sufficient. Output schema exists to explain return values, so the description does not need to detail them.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist, so the description need not add param info. With 100% schema coverage for 0 params, baseline is 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it is a health check covering configuration, network, authentication, and ASR cloud availability. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are specific functionalities (ASR, chat, etc.).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It is implied that it should be used to verify system health before other operations, but no when-not or mention of specific scenarios.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.